Search
Search results
LilyLovesIndie (123 KP) rated The Guardians (The MORE Trilogy, #2) in Books
Nov 5, 2018
I have to be honest when I say I abso-freaking-lutely LOVE this author, her style, and her books. SheÕs just absolutely amazing, and I really, really cannot sing her praises highly enough. That said, IÕd best give some justification for my gushiness ;)
Firstly, there is an amazing transition from the first book, with the drama and tension carrying over perfectly and just, well, seamlessly if IÕm honest. I read a lot of series (theyÕre like good shoes, you find a good one and you just keep going with it) and this is most definitely one of the best I have seen for a long while. This is all linked in with an absolutely incredible plot line. The twists and turns are immense, well developed and truly amazing from start to finish. The perspectives of the different characters are always completely crystal clear, showing a very good grasp of the craft.
Characterisation, as with in the first story, is incredibly well written and just, quite frankly amazing. They are all so enigmatic and developed slowly to make sure you really do invest and get to know them. It was great to see more of Tiernan and Emma is such a dark horse! I shanÕt say more so as not to spoil it, but she is most definitely a good addition to the character lists! Caleb and Ava are, as always, a delight to read and are perfect for each other, even if outside events are trying to meddle in that. Throw in the brilliant intrigue and mystery surrounding Ava and you have exceedingly compelling reading.
To conclude, I can do nothing more than repeat my words from my first review Ð EPIC, PHENOMENAL, AMAZING (capitals most necessary!) and I loved it. I devoured this book, reading in every available minute (even lulls in conversation in the staff room) and I cannot recommend it highly enough. I honestly could not wait to read the final installment and I was truly gripped by the book from start to finish.
*This book was first reviewed on Lily Loves Indie as part of a blog tour, for which an ARC was received in return for an honest review*
Firstly, there is an amazing transition from the first book, with the drama and tension carrying over perfectly and just, well, seamlessly if IÕm honest. I read a lot of series (theyÕre like good shoes, you find a good one and you just keep going with it) and this is most definitely one of the best I have seen for a long while. This is all linked in with an absolutely incredible plot line. The twists and turns are immense, well developed and truly amazing from start to finish. The perspectives of the different characters are always completely crystal clear, showing a very good grasp of the craft.
Characterisation, as with in the first story, is incredibly well written and just, quite frankly amazing. They are all so enigmatic and developed slowly to make sure you really do invest and get to know them. It was great to see more of Tiernan and Emma is such a dark horse! I shanÕt say more so as not to spoil it, but she is most definitely a good addition to the character lists! Caleb and Ava are, as always, a delight to read and are perfect for each other, even if outside events are trying to meddle in that. Throw in the brilliant intrigue and mystery surrounding Ava and you have exceedingly compelling reading.
To conclude, I can do nothing more than repeat my words from my first review Ð EPIC, PHENOMENAL, AMAZING (capitals most necessary!) and I loved it. I devoured this book, reading in every available minute (even lulls in conversation in the staff room) and I cannot recommend it highly enough. I honestly could not wait to read the final installment and I was truly gripped by the book from start to finish.
*This book was first reviewed on Lily Loves Indie as part of a blog tour, for which an ARC was received in return for an honest review*
Sarah (7798 KP) rated David Attenborough: A Life on Our Planet (2020) in Movies
Oct 14, 2020
Bleak and interesting
David Attenborough is possibly the most recognised face (and voice) when it comes to nature and our planet, and it’d be safe to say he’s also one of the most respected advisors on the environment. Now 94 years old, A Life on Our Planet is his “witness statement” for the environment and details his 60+ year career and how steeply the planet has declined during this time.
In the opening scene of this documentary Attenborough is in Chernobyl, the site of one of the worst man-made disasters in history. His comparison of the impact of the Chernobyl disaster to the impact humanity is having gradually on the environment is not one that many would have even considered, but it’s provides a stark warning. And it continues in this same vein throughout.
Whilst this still features beautifully captured videos of nature and historical footage of Attenborough throughout his career, this documentary has very dark and bleak overtones. Even the statistics on world population, carbon content and decrease in wilderness provided for certain years in Attenborough’s career prove to be crystal clear and unmistakably illustrating just how badly we’ve treated our planet in the space of a mere 90 years. For reference, wilderness in the 1930s was at 66% - in 2020 it has nearly halved to 35%. When you see it there in black and white, it’s terrifying.
Even more terrifying is Attenborough’s glimpse into the future. Showing what will happen to us and our planet in the 2030s to 2100s and beyond, it’s scarier than any horror film you will ever see. And what’s worrying is that the chances of this happening is a lot more likely than anything you see in a scary movie.
Fortunately this does move away from the rather effective warnings and dark tones and goes on to discuss how we can change to prevent this bleak future from coming true. These resolutions – stopping deforestation and overfishing, stabilising the population, more plant based diets – are nothing that we haven’t heard of before. However Attenborough does at least go on to suggest how we as a planet can move towards achieving the above and promote some rather positive success stories where this has already been achieved in a number of places across the globe.
My problem with this documentary is two fold. For one, Attenborough steers clear of the politics and blame game and doesn’t point the finger at any areas of society that may be more at fault than others (i.e. the super wealthy and their excesses). He just seems like he’s being too nice when really he needs to call out the people and areas that hold more responsibility.
My other issue is that he doesn’t relate the solutions to how we can help as individuals. Other than moving to a more plant based diet, the solutions proposed are not things that Joe public can help with and for me personally I found this very frustrating. I want to know what I personally can do to help and sadly I have no control over poaching, deforestation or over-fishing. I barely have any input into my local council’s initiative to build thousands of houses on the greenbelt behind my house, so the issues and solutions discussed here seem rather overwhelming and feel almost impossible to achieve.
However despite this, Attenborough has created a rather bleak and stark documentary that proves to be both depressing and incredibly moving and informative to watch. It will undoubtedly spur many into action and prove to be the warning we as a people need, especially with the final scenes showing how the wilderness has returned to Chernobyl and Attenborough’s reminder that we’re not saving the planet, we’re saving ourselves. I just hope those higher up that have the true power to put the solutions in place have watched this and taken note.
In the opening scene of this documentary Attenborough is in Chernobyl, the site of one of the worst man-made disasters in history. His comparison of the impact of the Chernobyl disaster to the impact humanity is having gradually on the environment is not one that many would have even considered, but it’s provides a stark warning. And it continues in this same vein throughout.
Whilst this still features beautifully captured videos of nature and historical footage of Attenborough throughout his career, this documentary has very dark and bleak overtones. Even the statistics on world population, carbon content and decrease in wilderness provided for certain years in Attenborough’s career prove to be crystal clear and unmistakably illustrating just how badly we’ve treated our planet in the space of a mere 90 years. For reference, wilderness in the 1930s was at 66% - in 2020 it has nearly halved to 35%. When you see it there in black and white, it’s terrifying.
Even more terrifying is Attenborough’s glimpse into the future. Showing what will happen to us and our planet in the 2030s to 2100s and beyond, it’s scarier than any horror film you will ever see. And what’s worrying is that the chances of this happening is a lot more likely than anything you see in a scary movie.
Fortunately this does move away from the rather effective warnings and dark tones and goes on to discuss how we can change to prevent this bleak future from coming true. These resolutions – stopping deforestation and overfishing, stabilising the population, more plant based diets – are nothing that we haven’t heard of before. However Attenborough does at least go on to suggest how we as a planet can move towards achieving the above and promote some rather positive success stories where this has already been achieved in a number of places across the globe.
My problem with this documentary is two fold. For one, Attenborough steers clear of the politics and blame game and doesn’t point the finger at any areas of society that may be more at fault than others (i.e. the super wealthy and their excesses). He just seems like he’s being too nice when really he needs to call out the people and areas that hold more responsibility.
My other issue is that he doesn’t relate the solutions to how we can help as individuals. Other than moving to a more plant based diet, the solutions proposed are not things that Joe public can help with and for me personally I found this very frustrating. I want to know what I personally can do to help and sadly I have no control over poaching, deforestation or over-fishing. I barely have any input into my local council’s initiative to build thousands of houses on the greenbelt behind my house, so the issues and solutions discussed here seem rather overwhelming and feel almost impossible to achieve.
However despite this, Attenborough has created a rather bleak and stark documentary that proves to be both depressing and incredibly moving and informative to watch. It will undoubtedly spur many into action and prove to be the warning we as a people need, especially with the final scenes showing how the wilderness has returned to Chernobyl and Attenborough’s reminder that we’re not saving the planet, we’re saving ourselves. I just hope those higher up that have the true power to put the solutions in place have watched this and taken note.
Chris Sawin (602 KP) rated Friday the 13th (2009) in Movies
Jun 20, 2019 (Updated Jun 20, 2019)
**I wrote this review a decade ago. I was going to change some stuff (mostly the last couple lines of the last paragraph), but thought it was too crude and hilarious to remove. Hopefully you feel the same way. Thanks for reading.**
In 1980, Pamela Voorhees set out to kill all the counselors at Camp Crystal Lake. Several years ago, the counselors did nothing as Mrs. Voorhees' son, Jason, drowned in the lake. Now, as the camp is about to re-open, Mrs. Voorhees has returned to seek revenge for her son and she only has one more victim before she accomplishes that goal. Unfortunately for Mrs. Voorhees, she didn't count on this particular camp counselor decapitating her and ending her reign of terror once and for all. Unbeknownst to anyone at the time, Jason was still alive and witnessed his mother's gruesome death. Now, in the present day, Jason is the one who seeks revenge and anyone who even comes near Camp Crystal Lake is at risk of feeling his onslaught.
It's been something like five and a half years since we last saw Jason Voorhees in the theater. So was it worth the wait? Does the remake measure up to the rest of the franchise? Is it a remake worth seeing at all? Does it continue the trend with 2009 being a strong year for the horror genre? The short answer to all of these questions is yes.
I've always been partial to the Friday the 13th franchise. Jason Voorhees has always been my favorite when it comes slasher films. So I was beyond excited by the time today finally rolled around. The film opens with a flashback that chronicles what would be the ending to the original film. Jump to the present day. Some kids decide to hike out into the woods to have some fun and wind up about a half mile from Camp Blood. Everything is fun and games until one of them turns up missing. The survivors wind up exploring and get picked off one by one while Jason wears a bag over his head. After the scene in the trailer where Jason runs towards the girl on the ground and swings his machete, we get a black screen with "Friday the 13th" in red plastered across it.
Six weeks later, Clay is looking for his sister, Whitney. She was one of the victims of the attack we just witnessed. It seems as though everyone has given up hope looking for her except him. Meanwhile, Trent and his friends are going up to his dad's cabin for the weekend which just so happens to reside on Camp Crystal Lake. It's basically just more pigs being sent out to slaughter from there. Jason's bag gets pulled off right before he disposes of one of his victims in a barn. It's there that he stumbles across a hockey mask and things begin to pick up from there.
The film definitely delivers in all of the elements that make up the formula to a Friday the 13th film. There's plenty of T&A and sex for any sexhound. I haven't seen any R-rated film with this much nudity and sexual content in quite a while. The kills are also pretty satisfactory for a Friday fan. I think Trent's death is probably the most memorable, but I'm partial to Amanda's death because it was an interesting twist on the sleeping bag kill. Officer Bracke's kill was also a favorite of mine. Then, of course, there's Jason's death. It's interesting since it seems obvious how things are going to turn out for Jason, but it winds up happening in a round-a-bout way. Something is thrown in there to throw the audience off and that not many would see coming. Kind of like a, "Oh, maybe he'll die this way instead," kind of thing. Thinking back on it, it also felt like a throwback to one of the earlier sequels, which is pretty cool.
We can't finish this review without talking about Derek Mears as the man behind the hockey mask. I feel like he did a great job. I prefer him over Ken Kirzinger in Freddy Vs Jason. He kind of reminded me as a cross between C.J. Graham(part VI) and Kane Hodder(parts VII-IX). He also ran at times, which may put some people off. I actually enjoyed the running quite a bit. It reminded me of Jason in The Final Chapter, which is my favorite F13 film. He had the body movements down to perfection and is a worthy addition to the list of actors who have donned the hockey mask.
My one complaint is that it seemed like it was hard to see what was going on in certain scenes. The camera would be too shaky or scenes wouldn't have enough lighting and be too dark. It's really a minor complaint though as it usually only lasted a few seconds when it did occur.
So, all in all, I feel like it was well worth the wait for this film. I am really hoping it does well because I would welcome sequels with open arms. The remake follows the Friday the 13th formula extremely well. Right down to the ending. I guess the only thing that's not like some of the previous sequels is the acting, which seems to be top notch for a slasher film. As a Friday the 13th fan, I'm more than satisfied with the remake. To tell the truth, it was just nice to see a film with Jason Voorhees in theaters again. And as I've told quite a few friends, the feeling I had after walking out of the theater was equivalent to the way I feel after I blow my load. Not many films can plaster that on their movie poster, but this one could. And really, that's the biggest compliment of all.
In 1980, Pamela Voorhees set out to kill all the counselors at Camp Crystal Lake. Several years ago, the counselors did nothing as Mrs. Voorhees' son, Jason, drowned in the lake. Now, as the camp is about to re-open, Mrs. Voorhees has returned to seek revenge for her son and she only has one more victim before she accomplishes that goal. Unfortunately for Mrs. Voorhees, she didn't count on this particular camp counselor decapitating her and ending her reign of terror once and for all. Unbeknownst to anyone at the time, Jason was still alive and witnessed his mother's gruesome death. Now, in the present day, Jason is the one who seeks revenge and anyone who even comes near Camp Crystal Lake is at risk of feeling his onslaught.
It's been something like five and a half years since we last saw Jason Voorhees in the theater. So was it worth the wait? Does the remake measure up to the rest of the franchise? Is it a remake worth seeing at all? Does it continue the trend with 2009 being a strong year for the horror genre? The short answer to all of these questions is yes.
I've always been partial to the Friday the 13th franchise. Jason Voorhees has always been my favorite when it comes slasher films. So I was beyond excited by the time today finally rolled around. The film opens with a flashback that chronicles what would be the ending to the original film. Jump to the present day. Some kids decide to hike out into the woods to have some fun and wind up about a half mile from Camp Blood. Everything is fun and games until one of them turns up missing. The survivors wind up exploring and get picked off one by one while Jason wears a bag over his head. After the scene in the trailer where Jason runs towards the girl on the ground and swings his machete, we get a black screen with "Friday the 13th" in red plastered across it.
Six weeks later, Clay is looking for his sister, Whitney. She was one of the victims of the attack we just witnessed. It seems as though everyone has given up hope looking for her except him. Meanwhile, Trent and his friends are going up to his dad's cabin for the weekend which just so happens to reside on Camp Crystal Lake. It's basically just more pigs being sent out to slaughter from there. Jason's bag gets pulled off right before he disposes of one of his victims in a barn. It's there that he stumbles across a hockey mask and things begin to pick up from there.
The film definitely delivers in all of the elements that make up the formula to a Friday the 13th film. There's plenty of T&A and sex for any sexhound. I haven't seen any R-rated film with this much nudity and sexual content in quite a while. The kills are also pretty satisfactory for a Friday fan. I think Trent's death is probably the most memorable, but I'm partial to Amanda's death because it was an interesting twist on the sleeping bag kill. Officer Bracke's kill was also a favorite of mine. Then, of course, there's Jason's death. It's interesting since it seems obvious how things are going to turn out for Jason, but it winds up happening in a round-a-bout way. Something is thrown in there to throw the audience off and that not many would see coming. Kind of like a, "Oh, maybe he'll die this way instead," kind of thing. Thinking back on it, it also felt like a throwback to one of the earlier sequels, which is pretty cool.
We can't finish this review without talking about Derek Mears as the man behind the hockey mask. I feel like he did a great job. I prefer him over Ken Kirzinger in Freddy Vs Jason. He kind of reminded me as a cross between C.J. Graham(part VI) and Kane Hodder(parts VII-IX). He also ran at times, which may put some people off. I actually enjoyed the running quite a bit. It reminded me of Jason in The Final Chapter, which is my favorite F13 film. He had the body movements down to perfection and is a worthy addition to the list of actors who have donned the hockey mask.
My one complaint is that it seemed like it was hard to see what was going on in certain scenes. The camera would be too shaky or scenes wouldn't have enough lighting and be too dark. It's really a minor complaint though as it usually only lasted a few seconds when it did occur.
So, all in all, I feel like it was well worth the wait for this film. I am really hoping it does well because I would welcome sequels with open arms. The remake follows the Friday the 13th formula extremely well. Right down to the ending. I guess the only thing that's not like some of the previous sequels is the acting, which seems to be top notch for a slasher film. As a Friday the 13th fan, I'm more than satisfied with the remake. To tell the truth, it was just nice to see a film with Jason Voorhees in theaters again. And as I've told quite a few friends, the feeling I had after walking out of the theater was equivalent to the way I feel after I blow my load. Not many films can plaster that on their movie poster, but this one could. And really, that's the biggest compliment of all.
Charlie Cobra Reviews (1840 KP) rated Train to Busan (2016) in Movies
Jul 7, 2020 (Updated Oct 22, 2020)
Thrillingly Unique and Entertaining Addition to the Zombie Film
Contains spoilers, click to show
This movie was great and the unique concept of having the survivors on a train was different from any zombie I've ever seen. Seok-woo is a divorced business man who never has time for his daughter, whose only wish for her birthday is to see her mother. After reluctantly agreeing to take her by train a zombie apocalypse occurs and they have to survive on the train. The scenes on the train were pretty amazing and really intense. Having to fight zombies in close quarters at times with no weapons made them incredibly tense, especially the ones where they had to sneak past them in the dark. As I said before a big thing that bothered me was that in certain scenes it appeared as if the zombies didn't actually attack the people to eat them but just bite them spreading the virus like World War Z. This was a serious let down for me in World War Z and the only reason I didn't make a bigger deal about it in this one is because there were scenes where a zombie was scene eating someone one that's already on the ground and also where they swarm someone who was already bitten, more than likely eating them. See to me the two greatest reasons why zombie are scary and so popular is because they combine two big fears that people have on a primal way. 1 is the fear of death and the dead, people don't want to die of course, but people are also afraid of dead things, dead people, animals etc.. And then 2 being eaten alive. That I think is something nobody would even wish on their worst enemy, so that's why zombies are such a scary movie monster. But when you change them to being infected instead of reanimated corpses and instead of eating the living they are trying to spread a disease by biting people and not eating them, it takes away from the horror part of it. I really liked the scene where the man with the pregnant wife, Seok-woo and the young baseball player gear up to make their way to the back cars to save their family members. I also liked the special effects used, everything except that deer in the beginning of the movie, which wasn't that terrible in the big scope of things but it reminded me of that prairie dog in the beginning of Crystal Skull (which was big red flag for that film). I have to say that this was really one of the better zombie films out there and I hear there is an animated prequel that was realized a month later and now talks about a sequel. I give this movie a 7/10.
Jamie (131 KP) rated The Ready-Made Thief in Books
Aug 15, 2017
Narrative flow (2 more)
Wonderful ode to Duchamp
Intense story premise makes it hard to put down
Plot felt a little weak with many aspects that are just plain illogical (1 more)
Science conspiracy was quite frankly boring
A love letter to Marcel Duchamp
Well this book is certainly interesting, so much so that I still don’t fully know what to make of it. The Readymade Thief is a love letter to Marcel Duchamp, a French-American artist that became famous in the early twentieth century for his influence on conceptual art. He is most famous for his readymades, manufactured pieces that he turned into art. His stance on what constituted art is an idea that could be applied to the novel.
“An ordinary object elevated to the dignity of a work of art by the mere choice of an artist.”
It’s art if the artist says that it is art. There are connections if that’s what you want to see. Duchamp’s life and work are threaded throughout the story, even some very small references that are easy to miss, and this was actually pretty awesome. The study of Duchamp’s work I think made for an interesting aspect of the story, and I liked the ideas about the fanatical secret society and the dark sort of humor to the plot.
I have to commend Augustus Rose for his skill in creating a narrative flow that was so easy to take in. For the first half of the book Lee appears lost, like she’s treading water. It had a dream-like feel to it as Lee drifts in and out of different events. As the story goes on and the mystery starts to unravel Lee finds herself completely immersed. This steady shift in tone is reflected beautifully in both the pacing and the prose, from a drug-fueled haze to cold sobriety.
So why do I feel so undecided about this book? The devil is in the plot itself, which to me felt like it had too many holes and not well developed enough at points. Most of the Crystal Castle plot feels like it was thrown out of the window and I found it underwhelming. Then there was Tomi, the hacker. If there is one thing that is difficult to write about hackers and the deep web. I won’t go into many details about it due to spoilers, but there were a lot of pieces of this portion of the plot that was just plain illogical and almost pointless. I even checked with a friend of mine that is a student in cyber security to be sure. Frankly the deep web is almost romanticized in the book when it really shouldn’t be.
Also while I know that convenience was important for creating the dreamy flow that I mentioned earlier, a lot of things seemed a little bit too convenient to be believable a lot of the time. A good portion of the plot was easy to predict, but I was still compelled to read because I wanted to know more of the why than the what.
This book was a pretty cool read overall if you can get over the hangups that I had. It is the type of book that will leave you feeling confused right along with the main character throughout the entire book. All in all it was a mixed bag of mostly good things. It’s definitely an experience and worth the read in the very least to appreciate the tone and the feel of the writing which was really great. It’s the type of story I could easily see adapted to a television drama that I would watch in a heartbeat.
“An ordinary object elevated to the dignity of a work of art by the mere choice of an artist.”
It’s art if the artist says that it is art. There are connections if that’s what you want to see. Duchamp’s life and work are threaded throughout the story, even some very small references that are easy to miss, and this was actually pretty awesome. The study of Duchamp’s work I think made for an interesting aspect of the story, and I liked the ideas about the fanatical secret society and the dark sort of humor to the plot.
I have to commend Augustus Rose for his skill in creating a narrative flow that was so easy to take in. For the first half of the book Lee appears lost, like she’s treading water. It had a dream-like feel to it as Lee drifts in and out of different events. As the story goes on and the mystery starts to unravel Lee finds herself completely immersed. This steady shift in tone is reflected beautifully in both the pacing and the prose, from a drug-fueled haze to cold sobriety.
So why do I feel so undecided about this book? The devil is in the plot itself, which to me felt like it had too many holes and not well developed enough at points. Most of the Crystal Castle plot feels like it was thrown out of the window and I found it underwhelming. Then there was Tomi, the hacker. If there is one thing that is difficult to write about hackers and the deep web. I won’t go into many details about it due to spoilers, but there were a lot of pieces of this portion of the plot that was just plain illogical and almost pointless. I even checked with a friend of mine that is a student in cyber security to be sure. Frankly the deep web is almost romanticized in the book when it really shouldn’t be.
Also while I know that convenience was important for creating the dreamy flow that I mentioned earlier, a lot of things seemed a little bit too convenient to be believable a lot of the time. A good portion of the plot was easy to predict, but I was still compelled to read because I wanted to know more of the why than the what.
This book was a pretty cool read overall if you can get over the hangups that I had. It is the type of book that will leave you feeling confused right along with the main character throughout the entire book. All in all it was a mixed bag of mostly good things. It’s definitely an experience and worth the read in the very least to appreciate the tone and the feel of the writing which was really great. It’s the type of story I could easily see adapted to a television drama that I would watch in a heartbeat.
Movie Metropolis (309 KP) rated How to Train Your Dragon 2 (2014) in Movies
Jun 10, 2019
Watch out pixar
Dreamworks’ How to Train Your Dragon was an example of setting your expectations low and coming out pleasantly surprised. The first film proved that the studio could create animated masterpieces and it left audiences across the globe hooked.
However, expectation has never been higher for its sequel, How to Train Your Dragon 2, but does it soar to the dizzying heights of its predecessor?
Thankfully the answer is a resounding yes. From beautiful animated dragons to breathtaking aerial-bound sequences, this sequel just about surpasses the original in every way.
Following on five years after events in the first film, Dragon 2 follows a 20-year-old Hiccup, voiced wonderfully by Jay Baruchel, and his sidekick Toothless in their home town of Berk as the residents come to terms with living peacefully alongside dragons.
Being Hiccup, he is naturally curious to learn about a legendary ‘dragon master’ who can enslave the beasts to form an army and sets out to persuade him to care for the animals like the villagers. This plot point is sidetracked from the outset however as we are introduced to Valka – Hiccup’s long lost mother, voiced by a rather miscast Cate Blanchett.
The bond between Hiccup and Toothless has grown massively in the five year break between films and this makes them even more enjoyable to watch. Yes, each of the villagers has their own dragon to look after, but it is the relationship between the two primary characters which we really care about the most.
Feline similarities in Toothless will not go unnoticed, his cat-like qualities give him an air of cuteness that you wouldn’t expect to come from such a menacing and ultimately deadly creature, and it is testament to Dreamworks that they have managed to craft such a personality for a character that never speaks.
The animation is also absolutely stunning, from the crystal waters of the sea around Berk to the people and dragons themselves, everything has been given an upgrade after the first film’s success and the battle scenes are beautiful in their simplicity – there’s no worrying about losing track of characters here.
However, it’s not all smoke and mirrors, the story has real meaning. Family values are explored, the way to treat animals is also looked at brieflyrs_634x1024-140205120546-634.cate-blanchett-bp.cm.2514 and ultimately, this is about one young man’s journey to maturity.
Unfortunately, the vocal performance of Cate Blanchett detracts somewhat from the overall magic. Her peculiar Scottish accent, which travels all over Europe by the time the end credits roll, is of particular annoyance and it’s a better film when she is not playing a central part. This is a shame as the realisation that Hiccup’s mother isn’t dead should be one of great consequence, but Blanchett’s strange acting hampers the scenes.
How to Train Your Dragon is to Dreamworks what WALL-E is to Pixar, each film is one of, if not the best animated feature from either studio and Dragon 2 follows that trend. It is the rare sequel that is superior to the first film – a la Spider-Man 2.
It’s an emotional rollercoaster too, and in some places very dark, possibly too much for children, but for teenagers and adults alike, there is something to enjoy here. From the engaging plot to the mesmerising soundtrack.
Overall, How to Train Your Dragon 2 is a fine film, helped along the way by some incredible animation, amazingly deep characters and a meaningful story. Only a poor showing by Cate Blanchett stops it achieving perfection.
https://moviemetropolis.net/2014/07/16/watch-out-pixar-how-to-train-your-dragon-2-review/
However, expectation has never been higher for its sequel, How to Train Your Dragon 2, but does it soar to the dizzying heights of its predecessor?
Thankfully the answer is a resounding yes. From beautiful animated dragons to breathtaking aerial-bound sequences, this sequel just about surpasses the original in every way.
Following on five years after events in the first film, Dragon 2 follows a 20-year-old Hiccup, voiced wonderfully by Jay Baruchel, and his sidekick Toothless in their home town of Berk as the residents come to terms with living peacefully alongside dragons.
Being Hiccup, he is naturally curious to learn about a legendary ‘dragon master’ who can enslave the beasts to form an army and sets out to persuade him to care for the animals like the villagers. This plot point is sidetracked from the outset however as we are introduced to Valka – Hiccup’s long lost mother, voiced by a rather miscast Cate Blanchett.
The bond between Hiccup and Toothless has grown massively in the five year break between films and this makes them even more enjoyable to watch. Yes, each of the villagers has their own dragon to look after, but it is the relationship between the two primary characters which we really care about the most.
Feline similarities in Toothless will not go unnoticed, his cat-like qualities give him an air of cuteness that you wouldn’t expect to come from such a menacing and ultimately deadly creature, and it is testament to Dreamworks that they have managed to craft such a personality for a character that never speaks.
The animation is also absolutely stunning, from the crystal waters of the sea around Berk to the people and dragons themselves, everything has been given an upgrade after the first film’s success and the battle scenes are beautiful in their simplicity – there’s no worrying about losing track of characters here.
However, it’s not all smoke and mirrors, the story has real meaning. Family values are explored, the way to treat animals is also looked at brieflyrs_634x1024-140205120546-634.cate-blanchett-bp.cm.2514 and ultimately, this is about one young man’s journey to maturity.
Unfortunately, the vocal performance of Cate Blanchett detracts somewhat from the overall magic. Her peculiar Scottish accent, which travels all over Europe by the time the end credits roll, is of particular annoyance and it’s a better film when she is not playing a central part. This is a shame as the realisation that Hiccup’s mother isn’t dead should be one of great consequence, but Blanchett’s strange acting hampers the scenes.
How to Train Your Dragon is to Dreamworks what WALL-E is to Pixar, each film is one of, if not the best animated feature from either studio and Dragon 2 follows that trend. It is the rare sequel that is superior to the first film – a la Spider-Man 2.
It’s an emotional rollercoaster too, and in some places very dark, possibly too much for children, but for teenagers and adults alike, there is something to enjoy here. From the engaging plot to the mesmerising soundtrack.
Overall, How to Train Your Dragon 2 is a fine film, helped along the way by some incredible animation, amazingly deep characters and a meaningful story. Only a poor showing by Cate Blanchett stops it achieving perfection.
https://moviemetropolis.net/2014/07/16/watch-out-pixar-how-to-train-your-dragon-2-review/
Ryan Hill (152 KP) rated Man of Steel (2013) in Movies
May 21, 2019
"It's not an s on my world it means hope"
Superman's origin has been retold in comics more than any other character. But how do you reboot such a beloved icon in film form without making his origin feel unnecessary to go through again. By handing him over to the masters of all reboots. While developing the story for The Dark Knight Rises, Director Christopher Nolan and writer David S. Goyer developed a new way to bring the man of steel to life. The duo previously saved Batman and made him a cinematic legend again and now they plan to save Superman from uneven sequels and a stale image. And who did they invite to lead this revival? None other than director Zack Snyder, a visual wizard with a lackluster reputation in storytelling thanks to his remake of Dawn of the Dead, 300, Watchmen and Sucker Punch. Now despite some filmmaking stumbles along the way, the trio make for a surprisingly great combination and deliver the modern Superman film we have waited 75 years for with Man of Steel. We are given both Superman and a Clark Kent who doesn't know his place in the world and is coming to terms with how the public perceives him.
As with all Superman mythology the story begins on Krypton, the planet that's hundreds of thousands of civilized years ahead of Earth. The whole planet is science fiction nirvana. The zooming spaceships, winged beast and advanced technology crafted from liquid metal. For once we experience the entire planet, not just a couple rooms made out of cheap crystal. There's a system of ways things work that has never been fleshed out on screen before. The government, the science and it's culture. At the head of the planet's scientific research is Jor-El (Russell Crowe) and he has discovered proof that may lead to the planet's destruction. But unfortunately his pleas towards his leaders are ignored due to the ongoing civil war with Jor-El's old friend General Zod (Michael Shannon). There's more history to the Jor-El/ Zod dynamic this time around which just enriches their conflict. There are millions of stories concerning Marlon Brando's $3 million dollar slumming in the '78 film. He intentionally mispronounced Krypton, made outrageous production demands and in the end that put him on the cutting room floor for it's sequel. Crowe see's Brando's paycheck acting and raises it with a performance full of gravitas. When conflicts begin to soften and punishments are served, more and more evidence begin to support Jor-El's claims of Krypton's destruction and with time and options exhausted, his final resort is to save his only son Kal-El. Still an infant, Jor-El concludes the only way his son will ever have any chance of life is to be sent to a more primitive alien planet and have a significant advantage over it's species. So he sends him to Earth, where it's sun will grant his body incredible abilities.
Jump 33 years later as the adult Kal-El, now under the name Clark Kent (Henry Cavil) is wandering the world trying to discover his place in it. There are multiple flashbacks to Clark's childhood with his adoptive parents Jonathan and Martha Kent (Kevin Costner and Diane Lane). Costner gives a heartfelt performance full of warmth as the father concerned with his son's well-being if the world rejects him. If someone with Clark's abilities were to be exposed to the public, it would be one of the biggest moments in human history. His existence alone would make everyone question religion, science and everything they had ever thought about the universe. And Lane strikes quiet, charming notes as the more understanding mother. Throughout his entire life Clark had been using his powers in secret, from saving derrick workers from fires to fighting a massive hurricane in his hometown of Smallville. If there's one word to describe Cavil's performance it's "Modern". He is not the "Aw shucks" farm boy nor is he the angst filled mess many feared he was going to be. There's still a humbleness, a sweetness and a sense of forthrightness to him. And of course he is a perfect physical representation of the character as well. As much as Christopher Reeve's performance still means to audiences today, it has reached a point where it has unfairly overshadowed the character. The idealism of Reeve's Superman isn't relevant today, at least not in the purest sense of the word. Cavil's Superman understands the difficulty of what his powers mean for the world and understands there really isn't anything to smile about.
Of course you can't tell a Superman story without his supporting players at the Daily Planet. Perry White (Laurence Fishburne, in an inspired piece of casting) knows the only way a newspaper could ever have hope at functioning these days is if they had major exclusives to the first alien ever revealed to the masses. Enter Lois Lane (Amy Adams, full of spunk) who has been chasing Clark's story all across the globe for several years. Lois has always been a tricky character to adapt, seeing how it's difficult for audiences to like her if you get it wrong. Can somebody who can't see Superman past a pair of thick glasses really be a Pulitzer Prize winning journalist? Thankfully, this Lois isn't as Shrill as Margot Kidder or as bland as Kate Bosworth in previous versions. Snyder and Adams treat Lois as the talented, dedicated journalist we know she really is by making her active at her profession and not having to prove anything just because she's a woman. The only thing she has to prove are her credentials, which are just as impressive as everything else about her. While some might be disappointed by the lack of romance between the couple, but to be fair, this isn't a Lois and Clark story, it's the story of Clark discovering his place in the world. But the spark between the two of them is certainly present when they first meet. For Clark to go from a lifetime of loneliness to have somebody instantly discover everything about you and admiring all of it is a luxury he has never had before.
Clark couldn't have picked a better time to make his presence known to the world, with General Zod returning to finish what he started. The cinematic Superman villains have created a history of scenery chewing performances dating back to Gene Hackman's Lex Luthor. Terrence Stamp was the first actor to portray Zod on film in Superman ll, but despite some memorable dialogue ("Kneel before Zod!") he was still essentially just a typical mustache twirling maniac. Zod this time around is nothing but bold tactics and is fully fledged to preserving his lost race, no matter what the cost. Michael Shannon is nothing but pure, demented megalomania. The only disadvantage Zod possesses though is that his body isn't used to the yellow son and must try and control all his new powers at once. Clark on the other hand, has had a lifetime to perfect his gifts.
Visual aesthetics have leaped skyscrapers since the Donner era. Snyder takes that technological advantage and gives fans what they have dreamed of for years. To put it bluntly, to see Supes punch somebody- really fucking hard! Snyder understands all of Superman's abilities and test them on the grandest scale imaginable. And he does so without resorting to his trademark slow-mo sequences and putting macho fantasies on display. In terms of action alone this is the first time the character has been given justice. Even as bombastic or repetitive it occasionally becomes, it can easily be forgiven because the character has been so overdue for it. It is unfortunate that cinematographer Amir Morki captures it all in a rather unpolished handheld style. But at least Snyder's chaotic direction finally seems to have a sense of aim and isn't relying on green screen to tell his stories. It may have to do with the influence of Nolan producing, but the end result is gloriously flashy, gritty and contains a well needed sense of gravity. And while Man of Steel never reaches the same dizzying heights as Nolan's Dark Knight trilogy, it still preserves and reintroduces it's legendary character in the same respect.
Snyder, Nolan and Goyer certainly have stayed true to the modern lore of Superman by adapting elements of his classic comic stories Birthright, Man for All Seasons, New Krypton and Earth One, and do so without damaging or over-explaining any of it. But if anything it's a science fiction story first then a comic book adaptation, in the vein of such first contact films as the original Day the Earth Stood Still and War of the Worlds. Man of Steel reminds us that Superman is not human, but still represents the best that humanity has to offer. It's the story of fathers, understanding your roots and taking hold of your destiny. It's always been that way for Superman, ever since he was created by young Jewish immigrants Jerry Siegel and Joe Shuster.
While the original theme music by John Williams is still the granddaddy of all superhero cinematic anthems, Hans Zimmer still creates a thunderous pulse of a score. Atmospheric, gentle and adrenaline charged, Zimmer accompanies Clark's drifting, the concerns of his parents and Superman's clashes with one perfect note after another.
Christopher Reeve for many people is still going to be the definitive Superman, but that's too be expected. For so long that's all we've had to go on as far as a great man of steel. There are multiple generations separating Reeve and Cavil and multiple generations separating their audiences. Will everyone accept Cavil as this modern Superman that understands today's humanity? As with Batman Begins, the conclusion doesn't technically set itself up for a sequel but it establishes an iconic part of it's universe in a nice wink that makes you want to see more of it. It isn't quite perfect, but this universe certainly deserved to grow. Because unlike what occurred in 2006, this time Superman really has returned.
As with all Superman mythology the story begins on Krypton, the planet that's hundreds of thousands of civilized years ahead of Earth. The whole planet is science fiction nirvana. The zooming spaceships, winged beast and advanced technology crafted from liquid metal. For once we experience the entire planet, not just a couple rooms made out of cheap crystal. There's a system of ways things work that has never been fleshed out on screen before. The government, the science and it's culture. At the head of the planet's scientific research is Jor-El (Russell Crowe) and he has discovered proof that may lead to the planet's destruction. But unfortunately his pleas towards his leaders are ignored due to the ongoing civil war with Jor-El's old friend General Zod (Michael Shannon). There's more history to the Jor-El/ Zod dynamic this time around which just enriches their conflict. There are millions of stories concerning Marlon Brando's $3 million dollar slumming in the '78 film. He intentionally mispronounced Krypton, made outrageous production demands and in the end that put him on the cutting room floor for it's sequel. Crowe see's Brando's paycheck acting and raises it with a performance full of gravitas. When conflicts begin to soften and punishments are served, more and more evidence begin to support Jor-El's claims of Krypton's destruction and with time and options exhausted, his final resort is to save his only son Kal-El. Still an infant, Jor-El concludes the only way his son will ever have any chance of life is to be sent to a more primitive alien planet and have a significant advantage over it's species. So he sends him to Earth, where it's sun will grant his body incredible abilities.
Jump 33 years later as the adult Kal-El, now under the name Clark Kent (Henry Cavil) is wandering the world trying to discover his place in it. There are multiple flashbacks to Clark's childhood with his adoptive parents Jonathan and Martha Kent (Kevin Costner and Diane Lane). Costner gives a heartfelt performance full of warmth as the father concerned with his son's well-being if the world rejects him. If someone with Clark's abilities were to be exposed to the public, it would be one of the biggest moments in human history. His existence alone would make everyone question religion, science and everything they had ever thought about the universe. And Lane strikes quiet, charming notes as the more understanding mother. Throughout his entire life Clark had been using his powers in secret, from saving derrick workers from fires to fighting a massive hurricane in his hometown of Smallville. If there's one word to describe Cavil's performance it's "Modern". He is not the "Aw shucks" farm boy nor is he the angst filled mess many feared he was going to be. There's still a humbleness, a sweetness and a sense of forthrightness to him. And of course he is a perfect physical representation of the character as well. As much as Christopher Reeve's performance still means to audiences today, it has reached a point where it has unfairly overshadowed the character. The idealism of Reeve's Superman isn't relevant today, at least not in the purest sense of the word. Cavil's Superman understands the difficulty of what his powers mean for the world and understands there really isn't anything to smile about.
Of course you can't tell a Superman story without his supporting players at the Daily Planet. Perry White (Laurence Fishburne, in an inspired piece of casting) knows the only way a newspaper could ever have hope at functioning these days is if they had major exclusives to the first alien ever revealed to the masses. Enter Lois Lane (Amy Adams, full of spunk) who has been chasing Clark's story all across the globe for several years. Lois has always been a tricky character to adapt, seeing how it's difficult for audiences to like her if you get it wrong. Can somebody who can't see Superman past a pair of thick glasses really be a Pulitzer Prize winning journalist? Thankfully, this Lois isn't as Shrill as Margot Kidder or as bland as Kate Bosworth in previous versions. Snyder and Adams treat Lois as the talented, dedicated journalist we know she really is by making her active at her profession and not having to prove anything just because she's a woman. The only thing she has to prove are her credentials, which are just as impressive as everything else about her. While some might be disappointed by the lack of romance between the couple, but to be fair, this isn't a Lois and Clark story, it's the story of Clark discovering his place in the world. But the spark between the two of them is certainly present when they first meet. For Clark to go from a lifetime of loneliness to have somebody instantly discover everything about you and admiring all of it is a luxury he has never had before.
Clark couldn't have picked a better time to make his presence known to the world, with General Zod returning to finish what he started. The cinematic Superman villains have created a history of scenery chewing performances dating back to Gene Hackman's Lex Luthor. Terrence Stamp was the first actor to portray Zod on film in Superman ll, but despite some memorable dialogue ("Kneel before Zod!") he was still essentially just a typical mustache twirling maniac. Zod this time around is nothing but bold tactics and is fully fledged to preserving his lost race, no matter what the cost. Michael Shannon is nothing but pure, demented megalomania. The only disadvantage Zod possesses though is that his body isn't used to the yellow son and must try and control all his new powers at once. Clark on the other hand, has had a lifetime to perfect his gifts.
Visual aesthetics have leaped skyscrapers since the Donner era. Snyder takes that technological advantage and gives fans what they have dreamed of for years. To put it bluntly, to see Supes punch somebody- really fucking hard! Snyder understands all of Superman's abilities and test them on the grandest scale imaginable. And he does so without resorting to his trademark slow-mo sequences and putting macho fantasies on display. In terms of action alone this is the first time the character has been given justice. Even as bombastic or repetitive it occasionally becomes, it can easily be forgiven because the character has been so overdue for it. It is unfortunate that cinematographer Amir Morki captures it all in a rather unpolished handheld style. But at least Snyder's chaotic direction finally seems to have a sense of aim and isn't relying on green screen to tell his stories. It may have to do with the influence of Nolan producing, but the end result is gloriously flashy, gritty and contains a well needed sense of gravity. And while Man of Steel never reaches the same dizzying heights as Nolan's Dark Knight trilogy, it still preserves and reintroduces it's legendary character in the same respect.
Snyder, Nolan and Goyer certainly have stayed true to the modern lore of Superman by adapting elements of his classic comic stories Birthright, Man for All Seasons, New Krypton and Earth One, and do so without damaging or over-explaining any of it. But if anything it's a science fiction story first then a comic book adaptation, in the vein of such first contact films as the original Day the Earth Stood Still and War of the Worlds. Man of Steel reminds us that Superman is not human, but still represents the best that humanity has to offer. It's the story of fathers, understanding your roots and taking hold of your destiny. It's always been that way for Superman, ever since he was created by young Jewish immigrants Jerry Siegel and Joe Shuster.
While the original theme music by John Williams is still the granddaddy of all superhero cinematic anthems, Hans Zimmer still creates a thunderous pulse of a score. Atmospheric, gentle and adrenaline charged, Zimmer accompanies Clark's drifting, the concerns of his parents and Superman's clashes with one perfect note after another.
Christopher Reeve for many people is still going to be the definitive Superman, but that's too be expected. For so long that's all we've had to go on as far as a great man of steel. There are multiple generations separating Reeve and Cavil and multiple generations separating their audiences. Will everyone accept Cavil as this modern Superman that understands today's humanity? As with Batman Begins, the conclusion doesn't technically set itself up for a sequel but it establishes an iconic part of it's universe in a nice wink that makes you want to see more of it. It isn't quite perfect, but this universe certainly deserved to grow. Because unlike what occurred in 2006, this time Superman really has returned.